|
The Academy and the Lyceum are places, and parts of Place,
just as "above," "below," "here" are species or parts of Place;
the difference is of minuter delimitation.
If then "above," "below," "the middle" are places- Delphi, for
example, is the middle [of the earth]- and "near-the-middle" is
also a place- Athens, and of course the Lyceum and the other
places usually cited, are near the middle- what need have we to
go further and seek beyond Place, admitting as we do that we
refer in every instance to a place?
If, however, we have in mind the presence of one thing in
another, we are not speaking of a single entity, we are not
expressing a single notion.
Another consideration: when we say that a man is here, we present
a relation of the man to that in which he is, a relation of the
container to the contained. Why then do we not class as a
relative whatever may be produced from this relation?
Besides, how does "here" differ from "at Athens"? The
demonstrative "here" admittedly signifies place; so, then, does
"at Athens": "at Athens" therefore belongs to the category of
Place.
Again, if "at Athens" means "is at Athens," then the "is" as well
as the place belongs to the predicate; but this cannot be right:
we do not regard "is a quality" as predicate, but "a quality."
Furthermore, if "in time," "in place" are to be ranged under a
category other than that applying to time and place, why not a
separate category for "in a vessel"? Why not distinct categories
for "in Matter," "in a subject," "a part in a whole," "a whole in
its parts," "a genus in its species," "a species in a genus"? We
are certainly on the way to a goodly number of categories.
|
|